• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Atheists take aim at Christmas

I support a student's right to dress as a pirate. Not so much because I endorse the FSM as much as it's because I fully endorse piracy. Pirates are cool. Way cooler than ninjas.
 
What's that picture in your sig? Isn't that the same thing other atheists on DP have had as their avatar? Hmm why yes it is. And even more atheists have passionatly supported a student's "right" to wear a pirate costume in class.

Cite all the exeptions to the rule you want, as exeptions prove the rule.

I stand by my original statement that the majority of atheists are not Pastafarians. Unless, of course, you would like to supply some facts which would support your argument that most of them are.
 
I don't need to know the feelings of the townspeople there to recognize the hilarity of that situation.

Yeah, you do. This was about anti-semitism.

What they were trying to do was avoid putting up a Menorah by calling the Christmas tree something other than what it was. It's just like avoiding calling Christmas Christmas to avoid offending someone.

No, they were calling the Christmas tree something else in order to continue their anti-semitism. Do you think that is OK?

It's removing the central point of the thing in question. The tree wuld not exist but for Christmas. To call it something else is simply dumb.

I agree, but the reason here has nothing to do with what you are arguing, demonstrating that the whole "war on Christmas" thing is not as widespread as you assert.
 
Atheists take aim at Christmas - CNN.com

You can see a picture of the sign at the link.

I agree with the Atheists right to display their own religious message next to the nativity scene but I don't agree with the way they are doing it. There is no reason for them to blatantly attack religion in their message. If they would have written the sign describing their believes and the purpose of Winter Solstice without the attacks then there would no issue here.

Do you think the atheists went to far with the sign? Should they not be able to place a sign at all?

I would love to agree with the Atheists here but they are making it hard.

I think their sign should be taken down, because it's inappropriate and lacks manners. We as a society have lost our real manners and etiquette, and we desperately need to get them back.:(
 
Atheists take aim at Christmas - CNN.com

You can see a picture of the sign at the link.

I agree with the Atheists right to display their own religious message next to the nativity scene but I don't agree with the way they are doing it. There is no reason for them to blatantly attack religion in their message. If they would have written the sign describing their believes and the purpose of Winter Solstice without the attacks then there would no issue here.

Do you think the atheists went to far with the sign? Should they not be able to place a sign at all?

I would love to agree with the Atheists here but they are making it hard.

I think their sign should be taken down, because it's inappropriate and lacks manners. We as a society have lost our real manners and etiquette, and we desperately need to get them back.:(
 
Christmas was purposefully placed on that date to usurp the pagan holiday. Next you're going to tell me there's scriptural evidence for the Easter Bunny and that it's not really a pagan symbol of fertility. The base argument is stagnation and original intent. The original intent of the winter solstice celebration is the pagan holiday. If original intent holds over actual use then any winter solstice celebration is pagan.

Evidence for the PURPOSEFUL selection of December 25th for that purpose? Love how you continually ignore the Biblical justification for a late December date that I have already pointed too.

Is the Easter Bunny part of the religious celebration of Easter? It isn't. Besides, the celebration of Easter in the Catholic world FAR PREDATES the Easter Bunny, which like the Christmas tree, originated in a NON-CATHOLIC area. Easter most definately is a Catholic celebration that has its roots in the Jewish Passover.
 
Last edited:
Being that Christmas is literally "Christ's mass", no.
Uhm that's the English version but in other languages there's no mention of Christ or Mass...for example in french it is Noel, in Spanish it's la Navidad and in German it's Weihnachten. I think it's pretty safe to say that English was not the spoken language when the Bible was written nor when Christ lived.
 
Uhm that's the English version but in other languages there's no mention of Christ or Mass...for example in french it is Noel, in Spanish it's la Navidad and in German it's Weihnachten. I think it's pretty safe to say that English was not the spoken language when the Bible was written nor when Christ lived.

The French word Noël derives from the Latin word natalis meaning birth.

Noël - Wiktionnaire
 
I think their sign should be taken down, because it's inappropriate and lacks manners. We as a society have lost our real manners and etiquette, and we desperately need to get them back.:(

Bad manners? Don't remember that being in the Constitution. They're not hurting anyone, let them keep the sign up. Freedom of speech>freedom to not be challenged in your beliefs.
 
I think their sign should be taken down, because it's inappropriate and lacks manners. We as a society have lost our real manners and etiquette, and we desperately need to get them back.:(
With all due respect what you're suggesting is incredibly Anti-American. Freedom of Speech gives people the right to post offensive statements whether you think it's appropriate or not. And lacks manners? OMG, really who are you to judge something like this?

I think the sign is offensive too but I will defend their right to display as I would anyone who is legally expressing Freedom of Speech.

What you are suggesting is that you want to censor things that are offensive and bad manners which is totally and completely illegal according to the Constitution of the United States. I'm guessing that upon further consideration you do not truly think the sign should be taken down, right?
 
I find that the atheistic nut is no more ignorant and arrogant than the religious nut.
The sign should be taken down.
So you do not support Freedom of Speech which means that you do not believe in the Constitution of the USA? Are you serious? Just because you're offended by what someone says as is their constitutional right you're willing to burn the Constitution? That is scary to me, sincerely, very scary.

Some of you talk about bad manners and how offfensive the sign is as if that justifies it's removal. It does not and if it did you would not be living in the USA. Russia or Venezuela perhaps but not the USA.
 
Bad manners? Don't remember that being in the Constitution. They're not hurting anyone, let them keep the sign up. Freedom of speech>freedom to not be challenged in your beliefs.

They are mocking someone's religious beliefs, and no matter how far fetched we might think those beliefs are, they shouldn't be mocked directly. This should be done behind their backs like people with manners do things.:mrgreen:

No, really, the atheists are out of line with what they are saying about religion directly there. They should get their own building or somewhere away from the manger and say what they like there, but not right beside the nativity. That's sort of inciteful to my way of thinking, and we need to watch inciteful.
 
Great but it does not mention Christ as another poster suggests the word Christmas as proof of a mass for Christ.

Yeah, I suppose it could be interpreted as referring to the birth (or "rebirth", as the case may be) and renewal of the natural world, although this hardly makes sense, since it's in early to mid-winter.
It would make more sense in the spring.
It sort of screws things up for Pagan/Christian unity that Jesus was supposedly born in winter, when nature has "died", and that Jesus died in spring, right about the time nature is "reborn". Then he came back to life, of course, but that's not really the same thing as being reborn. He came back to life as an adult. He didn't become a baby again. He crawled out of a tomb, not a womb.
 
Last edited:
They are mocking someone's religious beliefs, and no matter how far fetched we might think those beliefs are, they shouldn't be mocked directly.

And that is against the law how?

So here is what I've gotten out of the right.

Mocking Christianity = bad and should not be allowed
making amendments against Gays marrying = good and should be allowed.
 
Last edited:
So atheists are rude for putting up their sign. How many lawsuits and how many news stories have we heard in the last 100 years about putting religious symbols on public property and yet year after year xians continually thumb their noses at those of us who pay taxes and do not believe in their religion? Who is rude?
 
And that is against the law how?

So here is what I've gotten out of the right.

Mocking Christianity = bad and should not be allowed
making amendments against Gays marrying = good and should be allowed.

Not the mocking of Christianity, the mocking of religion. Need to keep it to yourself, or between you, and close friends. I believe having manners is very important in society, especially one as large as we have. Call it graciousness, tolerance, whatever, we need more of it.
 
So atheists are rude for putting up their sign. How many lawsuits and how many news stories have we heard in the last 100 years about putting religious symbols on public property and yet year after year xians continually thumb their noses at those of us who pay taxes and do not believe in their religion? Who is rude?

The deal with religious stuff on public property can be debated. It's not creating a national religion, this hasn't happened in this country in over 200 years. Religious expression is still free. The Christmas holidays rake in a lot of dough for retailers, and spin off into many areas, so it's good for the economy to a healthy degree. The atheists need to come up with something that delivers money into the coffers if they are so smart, or just sit back and let the Christians fall all over themselves, what's the big deal? I think it's a lot of nothing about nothing.

The Christians are putting a little babe in a manger with Mary, and Joseph, a couple cows, and a lamb. Who knows if these people even existed. Let them have their fun for crissakes and quit making a mountain out of a molehill is my philosophy.

Also, people are pretty smart, and they can figure stuff out on their own most of the time. This is just hatred and vengefulness. Doesn't speak well of atheists. Why waste so much time going to court? Really silly!:(
 
Not the mocking of Christianity, the mocking of religion. Need to keep it to yourself, or between you, and close friends. I believe having manners is very important in society, especially one as large as we have. Call it graciousness, tolerance, whatever, we need more of it.

Again so what? There is no law against mocking a religion.
 
Again so what? There is no law against mocking a religion.

Why do we have to have a law for everything?

We do have hate crimes. Gotta watch what you're doing in other words. If the stuff gets too vicious it could be considered hate.
 
With all due respect what you're suggesting is incredibly Anti-American. Freedom of Speech gives people the right to post offensive statements whether you think it's appropriate or not. And lacks manners? OMG, really who are you to judge something like this?
First of all, the first logical fallacy in this is the absolutism of the first amendment, the SCOTUS has already ruled that certain speech is NOT protected, like fighting words, incitement to riot, obscenity, libel, and defamation, you are taking an absolutist stance. Secondly, attacking people's core beliefs right next to a symbol of their core beliefs can be seen as an attack(fighting words) and if said people who felt attacked decided to riot, the onus would most likely be on those who started it, that is, the people who put an atheist slogan right next to a manger scene(incitement to riot), so, it could be seen by those who felt attacked and law enforcement as unprotected speech under the correct circumstances. Third, why attack people in that manner, anyone who believes in decency could make the call you are questioning, who are YOU to judge people's opinions?

I think the sign is offensive too but I will defend their right to display as I would anyone who is legally expressing Freedom of Speech.
It was in horrendous taste and the people who put it up should be ashamed of themselves.

What you are suggesting is that you want to censor things that are offensive and bad manners which is totally and completely illegal according to the Constitution of the United States. I'm guessing that upon further consideration you do not truly think the sign should be taken down, right?
See the first response.
 
Back
Top Bottom